1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass[11pt,preprint]{aastex}
3: \usepackage{epsfig,emulateapj5,apjfonts}
4: %\usepackage{epsfig}
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% macro definitions %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: \newcommand \Angstrom {\,{\rm \AA}}
7: \newcommand \AU {\,{\rm AU}}
8: \newcommand \erg {\,{\rm erg}}
9: \newcommand \g {\,{\rm g}}
10: \newcommand \K {\,{\rm K}}
11: \newcommand \pc {\,{\rm pc}}
12: \newcommand \s {\,{\rm s}}
13: \newcommand \sr {\,{\rm sr}}
14: \newcommand \yr {\,{\rm yr}}
15: \newcommand \myr {\,{\rm Myr}}
16: \newcommand \Teff {T_{\rm eff}}
17: \newcommand \bp {\beta\ {\rm Pictoris}}
18: \newcommand \hra {{\rm HR\,4796A}}
19: \newcommand \hrb {{\rm HR\,4796B}}
20: \newcommand \amin {a_{\rm min}}
21: \newcommand \amax {a_{\rm max}}
22: \newcommand \rin {r_{\rm in}}
23: \newcommand \rout {r_{\rm out}}
24: \newcommand \um {\mu{\rm m}}
25: \newcommand \mum {\,{\rm \mu m}}
26: \newcommand \cm {\,{\rm cm}}
27: \newcommand \Cabs {C_{\rm abs}}
28: \newcommand \fsil {f_{\rm sil}}
29: \newcommand \fcarb {f_{\rm carb}}
30: \newcommand \fice {f_{\rm ice}}
31: \newcommand \Vsi {V_{\rm sil+ice}}
32: \newcommand \Vsil {V_{\rm sil}}
33: \newcommand \Vice {V_{\rm ice}}
34: \newcommand \Vcarb {V_{\rm carb}}
35: \newcommand \water {\rm H_2O}
36: \newcommand \olv {\rm MgSiO_4}
37: \newcommand \Cext {C_{\rm ext}}
38: \newcommand \qext {Q_{\rm ext}}
39: \newcommand \magni {\,{\rm mag}}
40: \newcommand \simali {{\sim\,}}
41: \newcommand \simlt {\lesssim}
42: \newcommand \simgt {\gtrsim}
43: \newcommand \gtsim {\gtrsim}
44: \newcommand \ltsim {\lesssim}
45: %%
46: \newcommand \Fdisk {F_{\rm disk}(\lambda)}
47: \newcommand \Fstar {F_\lambda^{\star}}
48: \newcommand \Fsca {F_{\rm sca}(\lambda)}
49: \newcommand \Ftherm {F_{\rm therm}(\lambda)}
50: \newcommand \sigmap {\sigma_{\rm p}}
51: \newcommand \sigmar {\sigma(r)}
52: \newcommand \rp {r_{\rm p}}
53: \newcommand \dof {{\rm dof}}
54: \newcommand \Ndata {N_{\rm data}}
55: \newcommand \Npara {N_{\rm para}}
56: %%
57: \newcommand{\figwidth}{4.0in}
58: %\newcommand{\figwidth}{6.0in}
59: \newcommand{\bfdnote}[1]{{\bf[#1]}}
60: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
61: %------- delete following for submission to ApJ --------
62: %\pagestyle{myheadings}
63: % today's date
64: %use number register 200 for "decade"
65: %\countdef\decade=200
66: %\decade=0
67: %\advance\decade by \year
68: %\advance\decade by -2000 %to suppress two leading digits of yearb
69: %\countdef\hours=201
70: %\hours=0
71: %\advance\hours by \time
72: %\divide\hours by 60
73: %\countdef\mins=202
74: %\mins=0
75: %\advance\mins by \hours
76: %\multiply\mins by 60
77: %\multiply\hours by 100
78: %\countdef\miltime=203
79: %\miltime=0
80: %\advance\miltime by \hours
81: %\advance\miltime by \time
82: %\advance\miltime by -\mins
83: %\def\today{\number\decade.\number\month.\number\day.\number\miltime}
84: %\markright{\today: DRAFT}
85:
86: \shorttitle{Organic Matter in the HR\,4796A Disk?}
87:
88: %\received{2003 September 18}
89: \begin{document}
90:
91: \title{
92: %------------- enable for labelling preprint ---------------------------
93: % \vspace*{-2.0em}
94: % {\normalsize\rm submitted to {\it The Astrophysical Journal Letters}}\\
95: % \vspace*{1.0em}
96: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
97: Complex Organic Materials in the HR\,4796A Disk?
98: %\\{\small DRAFT: \today ~~}
99: }
100: \author{M. K{\"o}hler\altaffilmark{1},
101: I. Mann\altaffilmark{2},
102: and Aigen Li\altaffilmark{1}}
103: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Physics and Astronomy,
104: University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211;
105: {\sf koehlerme@missouri.edu, LiA@missouri.edu}}
106: \altaffiltext{2}{School of Science and Engineering, Kindai University,
107: %Kowakae 3-4-1, Higashi-Osaka,
108: Osaka 577-8502, Japan;
109: {\sf mann@kindai.ac.jp}}
110:
111: \begin{abstract}
112: %We model the scattered light of dust in the narrow ring
113: %around HR\,4796A in the near-infrared.
114: %We describe observations between 0.5 and 1.6$\mum$
115: %considering porous dust particles consisting of
116: %amorphous carbon, amorphous silicate and water-ice.
117: %Complex organic material, which was assumed as a major
118: %constituent of dust around HR4796A, is therefore not necessary
119: %to describe the near-infrared observations of dust
120: %in this system. Since carbon, silicate and water-ice are
121: %found in comets in our solar system, our results do not
122: %constrain the theory of planet formation around HR4796A.
123: %
124: The red spectral shape of the visible to near infrared
125: reflectance spectrum of the sharply-edged ring-like disk
126: around the young main sequence star HR\,4796A was recently
127: interpreted as the presence of tholin-like complex organic
128: materials which are seen in the atmosphere and surface
129: of Titan and the surfaces of icy bodies in the solar system.
130: However, we show in this {\it Letter} that porous grains
131: comprised of common cosmic dust species (amorphous silicate,
132: amorphous carbon, and water ice) also closely reproduce
133: the observed reflectance spectrum, suggesting that
134: the presence of complex organic materials in the $\hra$
135: disk is still not definitive.
136: %
137: \end{abstract}
138:
139: \keywords{circumstellar matter --- dust, extinction --- infrared: stars
140: --- planetary systems: protoplanetary disks --- stars: individual (HR 4796A)}
141:
142: \section{Introduction}
143: $\hra$ is a nearby
144: (distance to the Earth $d\approx 67\pm 3\pc$)
145: young main-sequence (MS) star
146: (age $\approx 8\pm 3\myr$; Stauffer et al.\ 1995)
147: of spectral type A0V
148: (effective temperature $\Teff\approx 9500\K$)
149: with a large infrared (IR) excess
150: which has recently aroused considerable interest.
151: %
152: %It is surrounded by a ring-like disk peaking at $\sim 70\AU$ from
153: %the central star and abruptly truncated both interior and outside
154: %with a width of $\simlt 17\AU$,
155: %as revealed by images of dust-scattered light
156: %at near-IR (Augereau et al.\ 1999; Schneider et al.\ 1999)
157: %and optical (Debes et al.\ 2008)
158: %and of dust thermal emission
159: %at mid-IR (Jayawardhana et al.\ 1998;
160: %Koerner et al.\ 1998; Telesco et al.\ 2000; Wahhaj et al.\ 2005).
161: Imaging observations describe dust scattering in the optical
162: (Debes et al.\ 2008) and near-IR (Augereau et al.\ 1999;
163: Schneider et al.\ 1999) and thermal emission at mid-IR
164: (Jayawardhana et al.\ 1998; Koerner et al.\ 1998;
165: Telesco et al.\ 2000; Wahhaj et al.\ 2005).
166: They reveal a ring-like disk with maximum
167: at $\simali$70$\AU$ distance from the central star
168: and $\simali$17$\AU$ width that is sharply truncated
169: at the inner and the outer edge.
170: %
171: %Dynamic modeling of the structure of the $\hra$ disk
172: %has important implications for planetesimal evolution
173: %(Kenyon et al.\ 1999) and reveals the possible existence
174: %of planets through the effects of gravitational confinement
175: %or perturbation on disk asymmetries (Wyatt et al.\ 1999)
176: %or the formation of dust rings with sharp edges
177: %(Augereau et al.\ 1999, Klahr \& Lin 2000, Th\'ebault \& Wu 2008).
178: The structure of the HR\,4796A disk has important implications
179: for planetesimal evolution (Kenyon et al.\ 1999). Furthermore,
180: possibly existing planets may generate disk asymmetries through
181: gravitational confinement or perturbation (Wyatt et al.\ 1999)
182: or form rings with sharp edges (Augereau et al.\ 1999,
183: Klahr \& Lin 2000, Th\'ebault \& Wu 2008).
184: %
185:
186: Very recently, Debes et al.\ (2008) measured a visible
187: to near-IR photometric reflectance spectrum of
188: the dust ring around $\hra$. To fit the observed
189: spectrum (which is characterized by a steep red slope
190: increasing from $\lambda \approx 0.5\mum$ to 1.6$\mum$
191: followed by a flattening of the spectrum at
192: $\lambda >1.6\mum$), Debes et al.\ (2008) argued
193: for the presence of tholin-like organic material
194: in the disk around $\hra$.
195: Tholin, a complex organic material, was detected as
196: a major constituent of the atmosphere and surface
197: of Titan and the surfaces of icy bodies in the solar system.
198: %The detection of tholin in the $\hra$ disk --
199: %if confirmed -- would imply that the basic building
200: %blocks of life may be common in extra-solar
201: %planetary systems as well.
202: The detection of tholin in the $\hra$ disk
203: -- if confirmed -- would imply that these potential
204: basic building blocks of life may be common in
205: extra-solar planetary systems as well
206: (see van Dishoeck 2008 for an overview
207: of organic matter in space).
208: %
209: %In view of its young age which places $\hra$ at a somewhat
210: %transitional stage between massive gaseous
211: %protostellar disks around young pre-MS T-Tauri
212: %and Herbig Ae/Be stars ($\sim 1\myr$)
213: %and much evolved and tenuous debris disks
214: %around MS ``Vega-type'' stars
215: %($\sim 100\myr$; see Jura et al.\ 1993, Chen \& Kamp 2004),
216: %this will provide valuable information about the formation
217: %and evolution of planetary system.
218: Its young age places HR\,4796A at a transitional stage
219: between massive gaseous protostellar disks around
220: young pre-MS T-Tauri and Herbig Ae/Be stars
221: ($\simali$1$\myr$) and evolved and tenuous debris disks around
222: MS ``Vega-type'' stars ($\simali$100$\myr$;
223: see Jura et al.\ 1993, Chen \& Kamp 2004).
224: Detecting organic matter in this system
225: will provide valuable information about
226: the formation and evolution of planetary systems.
227:
228: %However, we demonstrate in this work that a model population of
229: %porous dust grains consisting of common cosmic dust species
230: %(amorphous olivine, amorphous carbon, and water ice)
231: %which have been shown successful in explaining
232: %%the thermal emission of the disk (Li \& Lunine 2003a)
233: %closely reproduces the observed reflectance spectrum,
234: %suggesting that tholin may not be a major constituent
235: %dust species of the $\hra$ disk.
236: %This population of porous dust has previously been shown
237: %successful in reproducing the observed thermal emission
238: %of the disk (Li \& Lunine 2003a).
239: The observed thermal emission of the disk,
240: however, was previously reproduced with a model
241: population of porous grains consisting of
242: the common cosmic dust species amorphous silicate,
243: amorphous carbon, and water ice (Li \& Lunine 2003a).
244: In this {\it Letter} we question the existence
245: of tholin as a major dust component in the HR\,4796A disk
246: and study alternative dust models to reproduce
247: the observed reflectance spectrum.
248:
249: %In contrast to this result based on the dust reflectance,
250: %the thermal emission of the disk was described with a model
251: %population of porous dust grains consisting of common cosmic
252: %dust species (amorphous olivine, amorphous carbon,
253: %and water ice [Li \& Lunine 2003a]).
254: %In this work we study whether this population of porous dust
255: %can also reproduce the observed reflectance spectrum.
256:
257: \section{Model\label{calculations}}
258: Dust in the disk around $\hra$ scatters starlight
259: at visible to near-IR wavelengths and emits thermally
260: in the IR. The total flux of the disk $\Fdisk$
261: is the sum of the scattered light $\Fsca$
262: and the dust thermal emission $\Ftherm$.
263: At $\lambda < 2.2\mum$ the dominant contribution to $\Fdisk$
264: comes from the starlight scattered by dust $\Fsca$
265: which is calculated from
266: \begin{equation}
267: \Fsca = \frac{\Fstar}{4 \pi d^2}
268: \int\limits^{\rout}_{\rin}
269: \left(\frac{R_{\star}}{2r}\right)^2
270: \sigma(r)\,2\pi\,r\,dr
271: \int\limits^{\amax}_{\amin}
272: C_{\rm sca}(\lambda,a)\,\Phi(\lambda,a)\,n(a)\,da ~,
273: \end{equation}
274: where $d\approx 67\pc$ is the distance from the star to the Earth;
275: $\Fstar$ is the stellar atmospheric flux
276: approximated by the Kurucz model for A0V stars
277: with $\Teff = 9500\K$, $\lg g=4.5$
278: and a solar metallicity (Kurucz 1979);
279: $R_{\star} = 1.7\,R_{\odot}$ is
280: the stellar radius; % (Chen \& Kamp 2004);
281: $\rin$ and $\rout$ are respectively
282: the inner and outer boundaries of the disk;
283: $\sigmar$ is the dust surface density distribution;
284: $C_{\rm sca}(\lambda,a)$ is the scattering cross section of
285: spherical dust of radius $a$ at wavelength $\lambda$;
286: $\Phi(\lambda,a)$ is the phase function approximated by
287: the Henyey-Greenstein function at a scattering angle of
288: $\theta = 90^{\circ}$ (see Debes et al.\ 2008)
289: with the asymmetry parameter $g$
290: calculated from Mie theory for dust of size $a$;\footnote{%
291: The asymmetry parameters $g$ of the best-fit models
292: averaged over the size distributions show a gradual
293: decrease from $g\approx 0.96$ at $\lambda=0.55\mum$
294: to $g\approx 0.85$ at $\lambda=2.5\mum$,
295: indicating that the dust is highly forward-throwing.
296: We should note that one should not compare the $g$ values
297: calculated here with that of Debes et al.\ (2008),
298: derived from the observed surface brightness of
299: the disk together with the Henyey-Greenstein phase function.
300: The former specify the degree of scattering in the forward
301: direction ($\theta = 0^{\circ}$) of the dust
302: (see Li 2008),
303: while the latter approximate the mean scattering properties
304: of the dust averaged over the entire disk.
305: }
306: $n(a)$ is the dust size distribution which is taken
307: to be a power-law $n(a) \propto a^{-\alpha}$
308: with a lower-cutoff $\amin$, an upper-cutoff $\amax$,
309: and a power-law index $\alpha$.
310: We take $\amax =1000\mum$ and treat $\amin$
311: and $\alpha$ as free parameters.
312: %
313:
314: Following Kenyon et al.\ (1999), Klahr \& Lin (2000),
315: and Li \& Lunine (2003a), we approximate the dust surface density
316: distribution by a Gaussian-type function
317: $\sigmar = \sigmap \exp[-4\ln2\{(r-\rp)/\Delta\}^2]$
318: where $\rp$ is the radial position where $\sigmar$ peaks,
319: $\Delta$ is the full width half maximum (FWHM) of the distribution,
320: and $\sigmap$ is the mid-plane surface density at $r=\rp$.
321: We take $\rp=70\AU$ and $\Delta=15\AU$
322: (see \S2.1 of Li \& Lunine 2003a).
323: We take $\rin=40\AU$ and $\rout=100\AU$ since there is little dust
324: even at $r<55\AU$ or $r>85\AU$
325: (see Fig.\,5 of Li \& Lunine 2003a).
326:
327: We consider porous grains composed of common dust species
328: (amorphous silicate, amorphous carbon,\footnote{%
329: The other carbon dust species widely considered
330: in astrophysical modeling are graphite,
331: hydrogenated amorphous carbon,
332: quenched carbonaceous composite,
333: and organic refractory.
334: Their optical properties are not qualitatively different
335: from that of amorphous carbon.
336: }
337: and water ice; see Li \& Lunine 2003a).
338: %with the porosity $P$ (the fractional volume of vacuum)
339: %treated as a free parameter.
340: The optical properties of porous dust are determined with
341: Mie theory in combination with the Bruggeman effective
342: medium theory (Bohren \& Huffman 1983; see eqs.7--9 of
343: Li \& Lunine [2003b] for a detailed description).
344: %
345: We take the mass ratio of amorphous carbon
346: to amorphous silicate to be $m_{\rm carb}/m_{\rm sil} = 0.7$
347: and the mass ratio of water ice to amorphous carbon
348: and amorphous silicate to be
349: $m_{\rm ice}/m_{\rm carb}+m_{\rm sil} = 0.8$,
350: as inferred from the cosmic abundance constraints
351: (see Appendix A of Li \& Lunine 2003a).
352: %
353: Porous dust models consisting of fluffy aggregates of
354: amorphous silicate, amorphous carbon and water ice
355: with such mixing ratios have been shown successful
356: in reproducing the IR to submillimeter dust emission
357: spectral energy distribution of the $\hra$ disk
358: (Li \& Lunine 2003a, Sheret et al.\ 2004).
359:
360: For amorphous silicate dust, we assume amorphous
361: ${\rm (Mg,Fe) SiO_{4}}$, an amorphous material with
362: olivine-normative composition for which we take
363: optical constants from J\"ager et al.\ (1994).
364: The optical constants of amorphous carbon and water ice
365: are taken from Rouleau \& Martin (1991; ``AC'' type)
366: and Warren (1984), respectively.
367: %Although the optical properties of
368: %crystalline silicates may differ from that of
369: %amorphous silicates,\footnote{%
370: % While crystalline silicates in astrophysical regions
371: % are often found to be Mg-rich and Fe-poor
372: % (e.g. see Molster \& Kemper 2005),
373: % astronomical amorphous silicates appear to
374: % have a similar fraction of Mg and Fe as implied
375: % by the strong UV/visible absorptivity
376: % required to model the circumstellar emission
377: % (Jones \& Merrill 1976, Rogers, Martin, \& Crabtree 1983)
378: % and interstellar extinction (Draine \& Lee 1984).
379: % This suggests that amorphous silicates could
380: % be less effective in scattering the visible to near-IR
381: % starlight.
382: % }
383: %crystalline silicates are not included in our
384: %model calculations since observations at $\simali$8--13$\mum$
385: %with the mid-IR Keck LWS show no crystalline silicate
386: %emission features (Kessler-Silacci et al.\ 2005).
387: Crystalline silicates are not included in our model
388: calculations since observations at $\simali$8--13$\mum$
389: with the mid-IR Keck LWS show no crystalline silicate
390: emission features (Kessler-Silacci et al.\ 2005).
391: Although the optical properties of crystalline silicates
392: differ from that of amorphous silicates,\footnote{%
393: While crystalline silicates in astrophysical regions
394: are often found to be Mg-rich and Fe-poor
395: (e.g. see Molster \& Kemper 2005),
396: astronomical amorphous silicates appear to
397: have a similar fraction of Mg and Fe as implied
398: by the strong UV/visible absorptivity
399: required to model the circumstellar emission
400: (Jones \& Merrill 1976, Rogers et al.\ 1983)
401: and interstellar extinction (Draine \& Lee 1984).
402: This suggests that amorphous silicates could
403: be less effective in scattering the visible to near-IR
404: starlight.
405: }
406: the resulting reflectivity is similar.
407: Moreover, the amount of crystalline silicates,
408: if observed in disks, is significantly smaller
409: than that of the amorphous silicates.
410:
411: A major characteristic of porous dust is its porosity $P$
412: (i.e. the fractional volume of vacuum in a porous grain).
413: Li \& Lunine (2003a) have shown that the IR emission of
414: the HR\,4796A disk is best fit by dust with $P=0.90$.
415: We should note that the best-fit porosity of $P=0.90$
416: refers to the porous aggregates of amorphous silicate
417: and amorphous carbon; the porosity is reduced to $P\approx 0.73$
418: when ice fills in some of the vacuum under the assumption
419: of a complete condensation of all condensable volatile elements
420: as ice (see Appendix B of Li \& Lunine 2003a).
421: It is expected that the dust in the $\hra$ disk
422: will be coated by ice since at $\simali$70$\AU$ from the star
423: the dust will be cooler than $\simali$110--120$\K$
424: and ice condensation will occur (see Li \& Lunine 2003a).
425: Assuming a complete ice condensation,
426: the original porosity $P$ for the porous mixture of
427: silicate and carbon will be reduced to
428: ${\rm max}\left\{0,\,\left[1-2.68\,(1-P)\right]\right\}$.
429: Unless stated otherwise, in the following the porosity $P$
430: refers to the fractional volume of vacuum in ice-coated
431: porous dust. We will consider a range of porosities:
432: $P=0, 0.2, 0.5, 0.73, 0.9$
433: (which correspond to $P\approx 0.63, 0.70, 0.81, 0.90, 0.96$
434: if ice is removed).
435: %
436:
437: \section{Results} \label{results}
438: We compare $\Fsca/\Fstar$ with the visible to near-IR
439: reflectance spectrum of the $\hra$ disk compiled by
440: Debes et al.\ (2008) either from archival images
441: (HST/STIS 50CCD at $\lambda$\,=\,0.585$\mum$,
442: HST/NICMOS F110W at $\lambda$\,=\,1.1$\mum$,
443: F160W at $\lambda$\,=\,1.6$\mum$)
444: or from their newly obtained HST/NICMOS images
445: (F171M, F180M, F204M and F222M
446: at $\lambda$\,=\,1.71, 1.80, 2.04, 2.22$\mum$,
447: respectively).
448:
449: By varying $\amin$ and $\alpha$, we try to fit
450: the observational data of Debes et al.\ (2008)
451: with the porous dust model consisting of common dust species
452: for which the mass mixing ratios are taken from the cosmic
453: abundance considerations (see \S2).
454: We first take the porosity to be $P=0.73$
455: (which corresponds to $P=0.90$ for the porous dust
456: without ice coating; the model with $P=0.90$ gives
457: the best fit to the observed IR emission, as shown
458: in Li \& Lunine 2003a).
459: %
460: As illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:kml_refl},
461: the model with $P=0.73$, $\amin\approx 2\mum$,
462: and $\alpha\approx2.9$ closely reproduces
463: the reflectance spectrum of $\hra$.
464: %
465: In Figure \ref{fig:kml_dev} we plot the deviations of
466: the model predictions from the HST photometry at each
467: of the seven bands. The deviations are smaller than
468: $\simali$7.5\% for all wavebands.
469: %
470: It is even more encouraging that the same model also
471: closely fits the IR emission of this disk
472: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}), except its
473: slight deficiency at $\simali$10$\mum$ (but still
474: well within the observational uncertainties).
475: The model requires a total dust mass of
476: $\simali$4.27$\times10^{27}\g$
477: and results in a vertical visible optical depth
478: of $\tau_V\approx 0.048$ at $r=\rp$
479: and a mid-plane radial optical depth
480: of $\tau_V\approx 0.56$.
481: This justifies the optical thin approximation
482: employed in this work.
483:
484: In contrast, the model with $P=0.73$, $\amin\approx 1\mum$,
485: and $\alpha\approx2.9$ provides the best fit
486: to the observed IR emission (see Li \& Lunine 2003a
487: and Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}). However, this model
488: does not closely fit the observed reflectance spectrum
489: (see Figs.\,\ref{fig:kml_refl},\ref{fig:kml_dev}),
490: although the model reflectance spectrum does exhibit
491: a general trend (i.e. a steep red slope at $\simali$0.5--1.6$\mum$
492: and subsequent flattening off; see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_refl})
493: similar to that observed in the $\hra$ disk.
494:
495: The best fit to the observed reflectance spectrum is given
496: by the model with $P=0.50$, $\amin\approx 1\mum$,
497: and $\alpha\approx2.8$ (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_refl}).
498: The deviations from the reflectance data are smaller than
499: $\simali$6.2\% for all wavebands (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_dev}).
500: However, the model does not fit the observed IR emission
501: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}).
502:
503: Generally speaking, highly porous dust (with $P>0.85$)
504: does not fit the observed reflectance spectrum well,
505: while more compact dust (with $P<0.60$) is too cold
506: to reproduce the observed IR emission.
507: %
508: In Table \ref{tab:para} we list the parameters used
509: in the different models: the minimal grain radius $\amin$,
510: the exponent of the size distribution $\alpha$,
511: the porosity $P$, and $\chi^2/\dof$,
512: where $\dof\equiv \Ndata-\Npara$
513: is the ``degree of freedom'' ($\Ndata = 7$ is
514: the number of data points at
515: $\lambda$\,=\,0.585, 1.1, 1.6, 1.71, 1.80, 2.04, 2.22$\mum$,
516: $\Npara=3$ is the number of free parameters:
517: $\amin$, $\alpha$ and $P$).
518:
519: \section{Discussion} \label{discussion}
520: Debes et al.\ (2008) calculated the reflectance
521: spectra of ``astronomical silicates'', water ice,
522: hematite Fe$_2$O$_3$ (which is found on the surface of Mars
523: and responsible for its redness), and
524: UV laser ablated olivine (which has been used to
525: explain the spectral reddening of silicate-rich asteroids
526: due to space weathering; Brunetto et al.\ 2007).
527: But the scattering spectra of these minerals and ice
528: are too neutral at $\lambda$\,$\sim$\,0.5--1.6$\mum$
529: to match the steep red spectral slope of the reflectance
530: spectrum of the $\hra$ disk.
531: Debes et al.\ (2008) therefore resorted to organic materials.
532: They found that tholin or its mixture with other dust species
533: (e.g. water ice or olivine) are able to reproduce
534: the observed red spectral slope.
535: This led them to suggest that
536: ``{\it the presence of organic material is the most
537: plausible explanation for the observations}'',
538: with a cautionary note that ``... {\it longer wavelength
539: scattered light observations will further constrain
540: the (tholin-based) grain models,
541: particularly around 3.8--4$\mum$, where a large absorption
542: feature is seen for different grain sizes of tholins.
543: This would help to directly confirm whether Titan tholins
544: are an adequate proxy for the material in orbit around
545: HR\,4796A.}''
546:
547: However, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:kml_refl},
548: simple porous dust models consisting of dust species
549: (amorphous silicate, amorphous carbon, water ice)
550: which are commonly considered to dominate in
551: the interstellar medium (ISM), envelopes around
552: evolved stars, and dust disks around young stars
553: closely reproduce the observed reflectance spectrum
554: of the $\hra$ disk.
555: Our model provides at least a viable alternative
556: to the tholin-based models of Debes et al.\ (2008).
557: While the tholin organic dust model predicts a strong
558: feature around 3.8--4$\mum$ characteristic of tholin
559: (Debes et al.\ 2008), the porous dust model presented
560: here predicts a strong band at $\simali$3.1$\mum$,
561: attributed to the O--H stretching mode of water ice.
562:
563: The tholin organics of which the optical constants
564: were adopted by Debes et al.\ (2008) were made from
565: DC discharge of 90\% N$_2$ and 10\% CH$_4$ gas mixture
566: (Khare et al.\ 1984). They are extremely N-rich and
567: optically very different from amorphous carbon.
568: %
569: The dust in the HR\,4796A disk should be continuously
570: replenished. This is indicated by the low size cutoff
571: $\amin$ (of a few micrometers) of the dust required to
572: reproduce the reflectance spectrum
573: (see \S2 and Table \ref{tab:para})
574: combined with considerations of dust lifetimes
575: based on the radiation pressure and Poynting-Robertson effects
576: (see Fig.\,9 of Li \& Lunine 2003a).
577: The replenishing source would likely arise from
578: collisional cascades of larger bodies like planetesimals,
579: asteroid-like and comet-like bodies.
580: %that may (or may not) possess sufficient tholin-like N-rich
581: %complex organic materials.
582: We suggest, with interstellar dust as the building blocks of
583: the parent bodies, it is more reasonable to assume
584: that the dust in the HR\,4796A disk is composed of amorphous silicate,
585: amorphous carbon, and water ice.\footnote{%
586: The tholin model may still be viable if the dust in
587: the $\hra$ disk originates from the surface layers
588: of planetesimals, possibly through excavating collisions
589: (J.H. Debes, private coomunication).
590: In this scenario, the entire planetesimal need
591: not be composed of tholins; they might reside only on
592: the surface where they are created and then be released.
593: Due to significant processing and
594: possible alteration through planetesimal formation,
595: the surface compositions of planetesimals
596: in the $\hra$ disk may not resemble the ISM composition.
597: Based on what we know from our own Solar System,
598: methane ice and water ice may reside on the surfaces of large
599: planetesimals. These ices are exposed to the stellar UV flux
600: and may ultimately produce tholin-like organic residues.
601: }
602:
603: %Subjected to the radiation pressure outward expulsion
604: %and the Poynting-Robertson inward drag,
605: %the dust grains with radii smaller than $\sim$\,100$\mum$
606: %in the $\hra$ disk will be removed from the system in
607: %a time scale shorter than the stellar age (see Fig.\,9
608: %of Li \& Lunine 2003a), if not dynamically confined by
609: %one or more unseen low-mass companions.
610: %As shown in \S2, all models which fit the reflectance
611: %spectrum reasonably well require the lower size cutoff
612: %$\amin$ to be a few micrometers (see Table \ref{tab:para}).
613: %Therefore, the dust in the $\hra$ disk should be continuously
614: %replenished.
615: %%by cascade collisions of larger bodies like planetesimals,
616: %asteroid-like and comet-like bodies.
617: %The replenishing source would likely arise from collisional
618: %cascades of larger bodies like planetesimals, asteroid-like
619: %and comet-like bodies that may (or may not) possess
620: %sufficient tholin-like N-rich complex organic materials.
621: %With interstellar dust as their building blocks,
622: %it is more natural for them to have silicate, carbon,
623: %and ice as their bulk composition.
624: %Therefore, it seems more reasonable to assume that the dust
625: %in the $\hra$ disk is composed of amorphous silicate,
626: %amorphous carbon, and water ice.\footnote{%
627: % The tholin model may still be viable if the dust in
628: % the $\hra$ disk originates from the surface layers
629: % of planetesimals, possibly through excavating collisions.
630: % In this scenario, the entire planetesimal need
631: % not be composed of tholins; they might reside only on
632: % the surface where they are created and then be released.
633: % Due to significant processing and
634: % possible alteration through planetesimal formation,
635: % the surface compositions of planetesimals
636: % in the $\hra$ disk may not resemble the ISM composition.
637: % Based on what we know from our own Solar System,
638: % methane ice and water ice may reside on the surfaces of large
639: % planetesimals. These ices are exposed to the stellar UV flux
640: % and may ultimately produce tholin-like organic residues.
641: % }
642:
643: The model which best fits both the observed reflectance
644: spectrum and the IR emission requires highly porous dust
645: (with $P=0.73$ which corresponds to $P=0.90$ if ice is
646: sublimated; see \S2). While it is natural to recognize that
647: cold conglomeration of dust grains in molecular clouds can
648: lead to highly porous dust structures,\footnote{%
649: A porosity in the range of $0.80\simlt P\simlt 0.97$
650: is expected for dust aggregates formed through coagulation
651: as shown both theoretically
652: (Cameron \& Schneck 1965; Wada et al.\ 2008)
653: and experimentally (Blum et al.\ 2006).
654: }
655: at a first glance, it is harder to accept that comparatively
656: more violent collisions between larger bodies would result in
657: such a morphology in the resulting debris.
658:
659: To address this concern, we take the interplanetary dust
660: particles (IDPs) as an analog for the dust in debris disks.
661: %
662: The anhydrous chondritic IDPs collected in the stratosphere
663: possibly of cometary origin show a highly porous structure
664: (Brownlee 1987). Love et al.\ (1994) have measured the densities
665: of $\simali$150 unmelted chondritic IDPs with diameters
666: of $\simali$5--15$\mum$, using grain masses determined
667: from an absolute X-ray analysis technique with a transmission
668: electron microscope and grain volumes determined from
669: scanning electron microscope imaging.
670: They found that these particles have an average density
671: of $\simali$2.0$\g\cm^{-3}$, corresponding to a moderate
672: porosity of $\simali$0.4.
673: More recently, Joswiak et al.\ (2007) identified 12 porous
674: cometary IDPs (based on their atmospheric entry velocities)
675: with an average density of $\simali$1.0$\g\cm^{-3}$,
676: corresponding to $P\approx 0.7$.
677: Much higher porosities ($>$0.9) have been reported
678: for some very fluffy IDPs (e.g. MacKinnon et al.\ 1987,
679: Rietmeijer 1993), despite that highly porous IDPs are
680: probably too fragile to survive atmospheric entry heating.
681: Low densities are also derived for different groups of
682: meteoroids\footnote{%
683: By definition, meteoroids are small bodies in the mass range
684: of $\simali$$10^{-4}$--$10^8\g$,
685: which orbit the Sun in interplanetary space.
686: The atmospheric trajectories of meteors, i.e. the brightness
687: generated by meteoroids passing through atmosphere, contain
688: information about meteoroid orbits and densities.
689: Meteoroids are accordingly classified into groups
690: with different orbits, structure and composition.
691: The densities given above are valid for between
692: $\simali$50\% and 73\% of cometary meteor observations,
693: depending on the observation method.
694: The same studies show densities
695: of $\simali$2$\g\cm^{-3}$ for the remaining cometary meteoroids,
696: as well as for a significant part of the meteoroids ascribed to
697: asteroids, which is also moderately porous
698: (see Mann 2008).
699: }
700: ascribed to comets: the densities are
701: $\simali$1.0, 0.75, and 0.27$\g\cm^{-3}$,
702: respectively (Ceplecha et al.\ 1998),
703: corresponding to a porosity of $\simali$0.7, 0.8, and $>$0.9.
704:
705:
706: %Ceplecha (1977) suggested that
707: %the B-, C-, and D-group meteoroids\footnote{%
708: % By definition, meteoroids are small bodies made of
709: % rock and/or metal in the mass range of $10^{-4}$--$10^8\g$
710: % (i.e., considerably smaller than an asteroid
711: % but considerably larger than an atom)
712: % which orbit the Sun in interplanetary space,
713: % with small particles probably originated from
714: % comets and larger particles from asteroids.
715: % Based on atmospheric trajectories and orbits
716: % of meteors (i.e. meteoroids seen passing through
717: % atmosphere), meteoroids are generally classified into
718: % 5 groups with different structure and composition:
719: % Groups A, B, C, D and ``asteroidal meteors''
720: % (see Ceplecha 1977).
721: % }
722: %which are thought to respectively originate from dense,
723: %regular and soft cometary materials have a density of
724: %$\simali$1.0, 0.6, and 0.2 ${\rm g}\cm^{-3}$,
725: %corresponding to a porosity of $\simali$0.7, 0.8, and $>$0.9.
726: %%(also see Babadzhanov 2002).
727:
728: It is therefore reasonable to assume that the dust in
729: the $\hra$ disk has a high porosity (at least for those
730: originated from cometary bodies). We are not sure about
731: the relative contributions to the $\hra$ disk from
732: asteroid collisions and cometary activity.
733: Note that this is a long-standing problem even
734: for our own solar system (e.g. see Lisse 2002).
735:
736: To conclude, we argue that the presence of tholin-like
737: complex organic materials in the $\hra$ disk is still
738: not conclusive since the observed red spectral shape
739: of the disk can be closely reproduced by models of
740: porous dust comprised of common cosmic dust species.
741: A more thorough study of the scattered light
742: over a range of scattering angles would further
743: constrain the optical properties of the dust.
744:
745: \acknowledgments
746: We thank J.H. Debes and the anonymous referee
747: for their very helpful comments.
748: MK and AL are supported in part
749: by NASA/HST Theory Programs
750: and NSF grant AST 07-07866.
751: AL is supported by the NSFC
752: Outstanding Overseas Young Scholarship.
753:
754: %\clearpage
755:
756: \begin{thebibliography}{}
757: \bibitem[]{482}Augereau, J.C., Lagrange, A.M., Mouillet, D.,
758: Papaloizou, J.C.B., \& Gorod, P.A.\
759: 1999, A\&A, 348, 557
760: \bibitem[]{682}Blum, J., Schr{\"a}pler, R., Davidsson, B.~J.~R.,
761: \& Trigo-Rodr{\'{\i}}guez, J.~M.\ 2006,
762: \apj, 652, 1768
763: \bibitem[]{485}Bohren, C.F., \& Huffman, D.R. 1983,
764: Absorption and Scattering of Light
765: by Small Particles, New York: Wiley
766: \bibitem[]{688}Brownlee, D.E. 1987, in Interstellar Processes,
767: ed. D.J. Hollenbach, \& H.A. Thronson
768: (Dordrecht: Reidel), 513
769: \bibitem[]{488}Brunetto, R., Roush, T.L., Marra, A.C.,
770: \& Orofino, V.\ 2007, Icarus, 191, 381
771: \bibitem[]{693}Cameron, A.G.W., \& Schneck, P.B.\
772: 1965, Icarus, 4, 396
773: %\bibitem[]{695}Ceplecha, Z. 1977, in Comets, Asteroids, Meteorites:
774: % Interrelations, Evolution and Origins, ed. A.H. Delsemme
775: % (Toledo: Univ. Toledo Press), 143
776: \bibitem[]{} Ceplecha, Z., Borovi{\v c}ka, J., Elford, W.~G.,
777: Revelle, D.~O., Hawkes, R.~L., Porub{\v c}an, V.,
778: \& {\v S}imek, M.\ 1998, Space Sci. Rev., 84, 327
779: \bibitem[]{490}Chen, C.H., \& Kamp, I.\ 2004, ApJ, 602, 985
780: \bibitem[]{491}Debes, J.H., Weinberger, A.J., \& Schneider, G.\ 2008,
781: ApJ, 673, L191
782: \bibitem[]{493}Draine, B.T., \& Lee, H.M. 1984,
783: ApJ, 285, 89
784: \bibitem[]{495}J\"ager, C., Mutschke, H., Begemann, B., Dorschner, J.,
785: \& Henning, T.\ 1994, A\&A, 292, 641
786: \bibitem[]{497}Jayawardhana, R., Fisher, R.S., Hartmann, L., Telesco, C.M.,
787: Pi\~{n}a, R.K., \& Fazio, G. 1998, ApJ, 503, L79
788: \bibitem[]{499}Jones, T.W., \& Merrill, K.M.\ 1976, ApJ, 209, 509
789: \bibitem[]{708}Joswiak, D.J., Brownlee, D.E., Pepin, R.O.,
790: \& Schlutter, D.J.\ 2007,
791: in Dust in Planetary Systems (ESA SP-643), 141
792: \bibitem[]{500}Jura, M., Zuckerman, B., Becklin, E.E.,
793: \& Smith, R.C.\ 1993, ApJ, 418, L37
794: \bibitem[]{502}Kenyon, S.J., Wood, K., Whitney, B.A., \& Wolff, M.J.
795: 1999, ApJ, 524, L119
796: \bibitem[]{504}Kessler-Silacci, J.E., Hillenbrand, L.A., Blake, G.A.,
797: \& Meyer, M.R.\ 2005, ApJ, 622, 404
798: \bibitem[]{506}Khare, B.N., Sagan, C., Arakawa, E.T., Suits, F.,
799: Callcott, T.A., \& Williams, M.W.\ 1984, Icarus, 60, 127
800: %\bibitem[]{719}Kimura, H., Kolokolova, L., \& Mann, I.\
801: % 2003, \aap, 407, L5
802: \bibitem[]{508}Klahr, H.H., \& Lin, D.N.C. 2000, ApJ, 554, 1095
803: \bibitem[]{509}Koerner, D.W., Ressler, M.E., Werner, M.W., \& Backman, D.E.
804: 1998, ApJ, 503, L83
805: \bibitem[]{511}Kurucz, R.L. 1979, ApJS, 40, 1
806: \bibitem[]{}Li, A.\ 2008, in Small Bodies in Planetary Sciences
807: (Lect. Not. in Phys.), ed. I. Mann, A. Nakamura,
808: \& T. Mukai (Berlin: Springer), 167
809: \bibitem[]{512}Li, A., \& Lunine, J.I.\ 2003a, ApJ, 590, 368
810: \bibitem[]{726}Li, A., \& Lunine, J.I.\ 2003b, ApJ, 594, 987
811: %\bibitem[]{513}Li, A., Lunine, J.I., \& Bendo, G.J.\
812: % 2003, ApJ, 598, L51
813: \bibitem[]{729}Lisse, C.M.\ 2002, Earth, Moon \& Planets,
814: 90, 497
815: \bibitem[]{731}Love, S.G., Joswiak, D.J., \& Brownlee, D.E.\
816: 1994, Icarus, 111, 227
817: \bibitem[]{733}MacKinnon, I.D.R., Lindsay, C., Bradley, J.P.,
818: \& Yatchmenoff, B.\ 1987, Meteoritics, 22, 450
819: \bibitem[]{} Mann, I.\ 2008, in Landolt B\"ornstein
820: (New Series, Group VI, Vol.\,2), in press
821: %(Berlin: Springer-Verlag)
822: \bibitem[]{515}Molster, F., \& Kemper, C.\ 2005,
823: Space Sci. Rev., 119, 3
824: \bibitem[]{737}Rietmeijer, F.J.M.\ 1993,
825: Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 117, 609
826: \bibitem[]{517}Rogers, C., Martin, P.G., \& Crabtree, D.R.\
827: 1983, ApJ, 272, 175
828: \bibitem[]{519}Rouleau, F., \& Martin, P.G.\ 1991, ApJ, 377, 526
829: \bibitem[]{520}Schneider, G., et al. 1999, ApJ, 513, L127
830: \bibitem[]{521}Sheret, I., Dent, W.R.F., \& Wyatt, M.C.\
831: 2004, MNRAS, 348, 1282
832: \bibitem[]{523}Stauffer, J.R., Hartmann, L.W.,
833: \& Barrado y Navascues, D.\ 1995, ApJ, 454, 910
834: \bibitem[]{525}Telesco, C.M., et al.\ 2000, ApJ, 530, 329
835: \bibitem[]{526}Th\'ebault, P., \& Wu, Y.\ 2008, A\&A, 481, 713
836: \bibitem[]{749}van Dishoeck, E.F.\ 2008,
837: in Organic Matter in Space,
838: ed. S. Kowk (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press),
839: in press
840: %\bibitem[]{753}Wada, K., Tanaka, H., Suyama, T., Kimura, H.,
841: % \& Yamamoto, T.\ 2007, \apj, 661, 320
842: \bibitem[]{755}Wada, K., Tanaka, H., Suyama, T., Kimura, H.,
843: \& Yamamoto, T.\ 2008, \apj, 677, 1296
844: \bibitem[]{527}Warren, S.G.\ 1984, Appl. Opt., 23, 1206
845: \bibitem[]{528}Wyatt, M.C., Dermott, S.F., Telesco, C.M., Fisher, R.S.,
846: Grogan, K., Holmes, E.K., \& Pi\~{n}a, R.K.\
847: 1999, ApJ, 527, 918
848: \end{thebibliography}
849:
850: %\clearpage
851: \begin{table}
852: \centering
853: \begin{minipage}{140mm}
854: \caption{Parameters for porous dust models consisting
855: of common dust species (amorphous silicate,
856: amorphous carbon, water ice).
857: Model 5 is preferred since it closely
858: reproduces both the observed reflectance
859: spectrum (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_refl})
860: and the observed IR emission
861: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}).
862: Although model 3 fits the observed reflectance
863: spectrum better than any other models
864: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_refl}), it does not
865: fit the observed IR emission
866: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}).
867: \label{tab:para}
868: }
869: \begin{center}
870: \begin{tabular}{ccccc}
871: \hline
872: Dust & $\amin$ & $\alpha$ & Porosity
873: & $\chi^2/{\rm dof}$ \\
874: Model & ($\mu$m) & & (\%) & \\
875: \hline
876: 1 & 1 & 2.8 & 0 & 0.47 \\
877: 2 & 1 & 2.8 & 20 & 0.33 \\
878: 3 & 1 & 2.8 & 50 & 0.14 \\
879: 4 & 1 & 2.9 & 73 & 1.19 \\
880: {\bf 5} & {\bf 2} & {\bf 2.9} & {\bf 73} & {\bf 0.23} \\
881: 6 & 4 & 3.2 & 90 & 1.74 \\
882: \hline
883: \end{tabular}
884: \end{center}
885: \end{minipage}
886: \end{table}
887: %\clearpage
888:
889: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Figure 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%
890: \begin{figure}
891: \begin{center}
892: \includegraphics[width=12.8cm]{f1.eps}
893: \end{center}
894: \caption{\label{fig:kml_refl}
895: Comparison of the model scattered light
896: spectra with the observed visible to near-IR
897: reflectance spectrum of the $\hra$ disk
898: of Debes et al.\ (2008; crosses).
899: Diamonds show the model spectra convolved
900: with the HST STIS and NICMOS filters.
901: The model with $P=0.73$, $\amin=2\mum$
902: and $\alpha=2.9$ (red solid line) is preferred
903: since it fits both the observed reflectance spectrum
904: and the observed IR emission (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}).
905: While the model with $P=0.50$, $\amin=1\mum$
906: and $\alpha=2.8$ (cyan dotted line) fits the
907: reflectance spectrum better than any other models,
908: it does not fit the observed IR emission
909: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}).
910: In contrast, the model with $P=0.73$, $\amin=1\mum$
911: and $\alpha=2.9$ (blue dashed line) provides an
912: excellent fit to the observed IR emission,
913: its fit to the observed reflectance spectrum
914: is not as good as the other two models shown
915: in this figure.
916: }
917: \end{figure}
918:
919: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Figure 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%
920: \begin{figure}
921: \begin{center}
922: \includegraphics[width=12.8cm]{f2.eps}
923: \end{center}
924: \caption{\label{fig:kml_dev}
925: Deviations
926: $\left|\left[\Fsca/F_\lambda^{\star}\right]_{\rm mod}/
927: \left[\Fsca/F_\lambda^{\star}\right]_{\rm obs} - 1\right|$
928: of the model results
929: (integrated over the instrument filters)
930: from the HST STIS and NICMOS photometry
931: at each of the seven bands.
932: The deviations are within
933: $\simali$7.5\% at all wavebands
934: for the preferred model
935: (with $P=0.73$, $\amin=2\mum$ and $\alpha=2.9$)
936: which closely fits both the reflectance spectrum
937: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_refl})
938: and the IR emission of the $\hra$ disk
939: (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:kml_irem}).
940: }
941: \end{figure}
942:
943: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Figure 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%
944:
945: \begin{figure}
946: \begin{center}
947: \includegraphics[width=12.8cm]{f3.cps}
948: \end{center}
949: \caption{\label{fig:kml_irem}
950: Comparison of the observed IR emission
951: of the HR\,4796A dust disk to the model
952: spectra calculated from the porous dust models
953: consisting of amorphous silicate, amorphous carbon
954: and ice.
955: }
956: \end{figure}
957:
958: \end{document}
959: